Stacked and None Stacked

I have posted a few stacked images of the moon. This lead a few people to ask or not have thought about using a stack for astro work.

So here is a Stacked and a None Stacked image.

Both have had a very similar, if not that same post processing in Photoshop.

Stacked - 50 images stacked




None Stacked




Exif: Pentax K3, 1/200, ISO100, Prime Focus Sky-Watcher 80mm Refractor, Neodynium and Baader Fringe Killer IR Cut Filters and Sky-Watcher Star Adventuer 2i for Tracking.

Minimal difference at that image size Spad...sure it will be more noticeable at a larger size.

I suspect the ability to use a proper 'tracker' has more of an impact on moonshots than stacking.

As someone mentioned on a previous thread the moon 'whizzes' across the viewfinder when imaging without a tracker as i've found out to my cost on all my moonshots!

Keep up the good spacework though...great to see. There really should be an 'Astro' category to put shots like these into.

regards

Karlo

Tracking is only really needed at very high magnification when shooting the moon. You can get just as good images without it, as long as you don't go right in. Stacking 40 or 50 images shot with a 400 or 500mm lens then crop will give you much better results.

I should point out my monitor is a 52in TV

Hi Spad,

I downloaded the 2 images so I could do a sort of blink switch between the two to compare and reveal differences.

This is what I think I can sees:

1) The stacked version definitely has finer details
2) The stacked version has a much smoother tonal gradation
3) The stacked version has less contrast
4) The stacked version loses some of the crater detail at the terminator

On balance I definitely prefer the stacked version.

It would be great to see higher resolution versions.

Nice work.

Cheers
Mike

That explains a lot...i'm using a 22" NEC monitor...not even full HD!

I hope you don't mind me messing with your image. I unleashed Topaz A.I. on it to see if it could improve the motion blur. It appears to have done so quite well.

I've just done a very quicl and dirty blink comparision of the stacked vs. stacked+topaz images.

The Topaz'd version does show a remarkable shapeness and contrast improvement.

Where will A.I. take us?

Mike

A WOW followed by a sharp intake of breath, and exhale of "HOW F*****G MUCH?!?!?!?" (My Yorkshire heritage kicked in!!) When I saw the price of TopazAI....

David.... could you please dial it back a tad? It's really neat what you've done, but I think the effect maybe a bit to strong for my liking.

Also guys... these are CROPS!!!

I was only working with my 80mm Refractor... it has a focal length of inly 400mm at f5. Next time the moon is out, as no clouds!!! I am going to shoot it with my 6in 750mm f5 Newtonian Reflector. None Tracked.

Most interesting topic. I too couldn't resist in playing with your pic Spad in Rawtherapee. Here it is in black and white but the detail is good, I have used RT to resize it, new to me as I usually use GIMP, and ticked 'Allow upscaling'.

Yes, an interesting topic. But still some way to go before an image can match this one (LINK - click on image to expand it to its full glory) .

Steve

How the hell can I compete with NASA?!?!?!?!?!?!?!?

They were using that old fashioned stuff called film, you've got digital!!!

Steve

But they were a damn sight closer than the 240,000 miles that I am!!!1

Beautiful job DavidWozHere, have a friend who is a impact survey, botanical science etc and swears by it, (topaz that is) Liked